MRA/MRM futility

Author: Analgesic.Spectre ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 15
  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    As men become increasingly disenfranchised with society (see MGTOW), their genuine issues are being met with little but derision by most women. Barring individuals like Cassie Jay and Girlwriteswhat, who are arguably in it for the attention/money, honest discussion about men's issues, from my experience, is met with one of four responses:

    1) NAWALT (not all women are like that)
    2) Be a man
    3) Work hard [for women]
    4) Stop whining

    For example, from 2009-2014 in the UK, 97% of workplace deaths were men (http://www.inside-man.co.uk/2015/03/03/97-employees-die-work-men-2009-2014-figures/).

    Where is the media hysteria about this? Where are the conversations about this? Where are the feminists campaigning for equality now? Please, find me a source where you have droves of men and women discussing this, much like they would discuss feminist issues (e.gs. rape culture, the wage gap).

    What could explain this apathy?

    Personally, and this is yet to be armed with statistics, I think this extends from men's place in sexual reproduction. You can birth 50 children every 9 months with 50 women and 1 man in your tribe, yet only 1 child with a tribe of 50 men and 1 woman. Unless the man brings some kind of utility to the tribe (such as physical strength, which is why woman are attracted to it), there is no reason for the tribe to keep him alive, whereas a (fertile) woman is inherently valuable. This is why these alarming statistics don't register many cares throughout the world. We're biologically programmed to care less about men than women, unless the men are useful. Women are human beings; men are human doings.

    The fact that workplace death, and many other statistics (male homelessness, family court bias, inequality in teacher rape convictions, child custody disparity etc.) are largely ignored by larger media, suggests a rather uncomfortable truth: men, and their feelings, are disposable. If we are to agree that this is the case, and I think there could be debate on this claim, then we reach the conclusion that it is futile to argue MRA/MRM stances, simply because women (and society at large) don't care about men.
  • Smithereens
    Smithereens avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 502
    2
    1
    4
    Smithereens avatar
    Smithereens

79 days later

  • Wylted
    Wylted avatar
    Debates: 26
    Forum posts: 2,603
    3
    4
    9
    Wylted avatar
    Wylted
    Inequality in teacher rape convictions? You mean the 16 year old boys who fuck their hot history teacher vs the men who prey on little girls by giving them drugs or alcohol and typically target pre teens. Wow the courts are so biased against men in this situation.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,269
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    Men need women like a bicycle needs a fish.
  • Tyronebiggs
    Tyronebiggs avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 29
    0
    0
    5
    Tyronebiggs avatar
    Tyronebiggs
    --> @Greyparrot
    That sounds pretty gay bro. I have no problem with you guys, Jesus accepts all of you into the kingdom if you ask for forgiveness and ask him into your life. You shouldn't be getting married though. You should fight your sinful urges and be with a woman instead of claiming not to need them.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,269
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Tyronebiggs
    It was a tribute to Gloria Steinem.
  • Tyronebiggs
    Tyronebiggs avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 29
    0
    0
    5
    Tyronebiggs avatar
    Tyronebiggs
    --> @Greyparrot
    Good, for a second I thought you were gayparrot 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 8,269
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Tyronebiggs
    cis bad

21 days later

  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    There isn't a reply worth responding to, lol.
  • FaustianJustice
    FaustianJustice avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 146
    0
    1
    3
    FaustianJustice avatar
    FaustianJustice
    --> @Analgesic.Spectre
    Okay, How to start.

    1) NAWALT (not all women are like that)

    The odds of this are pretty much confirmed, there are outliers to the stereotype.

    To lend credence to the point, you need to say "enough women are like this..." which would really go miles to your observation.

    2) Be a man
    Whatever that means.  

    3) Work hard [for women]
    Work hard, in general, or work smart in general.  The nature of a capitalist society is you are working for some one else.  Own the means of production, or choose whom shares the wealth of your ability.

    4) Stop whining
    Duh.  If you have grievance, ground it in reality, demonstrate your issue.  


    RE the rest.... um... sure?  Find me a random sampling of 50 men, I assure you, there will be some people you won't want to mate with.

    Were I to supply you 50 women, do you have a preference, or do you have an order?


  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    --> @FaustianJustice
    The odds of this are pretty much confirmed, there are outliers to the stereotype.
    Literally, yes; however, the conversational function of NAWALT is a digression (in that, rather than speaking about a summary of women, the topic is shifted towards women who are outliers).

    Conversation isn't singularly dimensional.

    To lend credence to the point, you need to say "enough women are like this..." which would really go miles to your observation.
    Again, literally, this is a better way of expressing the sentiment. I'm not adverse to your correction, either (I think it's great).

    Whatever that means.
    Precisely. Similar to the conception of racism, it is a nebulous term filled with emotional manipulation.

    Work hard, in general, or work smart in general.  The nature of a capitalist society is you are working for some one else.  Own the means of production, or choose whom shares the wealth of your ability.
    Is your wife your employer? I daresay my point has been missed.

    Duh.  If you have grievance, ground it in reality, demonstrate your issue.  
    I think the expression of "stop whining" hints at the sinister underlying psychological phenomenon of near-complete apathy of male emotions. Even when concerns are grounded in reality, the apathy persists (I've seen this happen dozens of times; I provided the workplace death statistics to support it, too).

    Find me a random sampling of 50 men, I assure you, there will be some people you won't want to mate with.

    Were I to supply you 50 women, do you have a preference, or do you have an order?
    My point here didn't address mate selection. My point addressed the effects of sexual dimorphism on reactions to male suffering. Please read it again.

  • FaustianJustice
    FaustianJustice avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 146
    0
    1
    3
    FaustianJustice avatar
    FaustianJustice
    --> @Analgesic.Spectre
    Is your wife your employer? I daresay my point has been missed.

    No, but we mutually enjoy the benefits of eachother's labors.  Don't daresay that, I stand by my observation, your labors fruits are most recognized by some one downstream of your efforts.  

    My point here didn't address mate selection. My point addressed the effects of sexual dimorphism on reactions to male suffering. Please read it again.

    I agree.  Your point didn't address one of the most salient aspects of human sexuality: preference.  Males have a preference.  Females have a preference.  The fifty male and one female vs fifty female and one male relation removed human preference.  Is that something you care to address?
  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    --> @FaustianJustice
    No, but we mutually enjoy the benefits of eachother's labors.  Don't daresay that, I stand by my observation, your labors fruits are most recognized by some one downstream of your efforts.  
    Ah but the original, quoted retort to summarising women's behaviour was "work hard", with the implication that is was for women. Your conception here, that you *both* enjoy each other's labour (I don't think is accurate, but I won't digress), is not reflected in my OP's quoted retort. Moreover, my issue is that discussion of men's issues is derailed with redirection of focus (towards women).

    I agree.  Your point didn't address one of the most salient aspects of human sexuality: preference.  Males have a preference.  Females have a preference.  The fifty male and one female vs fifty female and one male relation removed human preference.  Is that something you care to address?
    Demonstration of breeding capacity need not control for preference, barring that the 50 women and 1 man, and the 50 men and 1 woman, are not likely/certain to produce the same amount of offspring (which, prima facie, is absurd. Feel free to prove otherwise).

  • FaustianJustice
    FaustianJustice avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 146
    0
    1
    3
    FaustianJustice avatar
    FaustianJustice
    --> @Analgesic.Spectre
    Demonstration of breeding capacity need not control for preference, barring that the 50 women and 1 man, and the 50 men and 1 woman, are not likely/certain to produce the same amount of offspring (which, prima facie, is absurd. Feel free to prove otherwise).
    I will appeal to common sense.

    50 women do NOT want to breed with a male whom has Down's syndrome.

    The tragic part is that 50 men MIGHT want to breed with a female whom has Down's syndrome.

  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    --> @FaustianJustice
    I will appeal to common sense.
    In other words: Circular reasoning.

    50 women do NOT want to breed with a male whom has Down's syndrome.
    How likely is it that a random man will have Down's syndrome, let alone the alpha male of a tribe?

    You are clutching at straws in your (perhaps unintentional) attempt to miss the point.

    The tragic part is that 50 men MIGHT want to breed with a female whom has Down's syndrome.
    Although we're digressing here, it's not tragic. It's simply sexual dimorphism in action. Mass insemination is an effective male breeding strategy, even at the expense of a higher infant mortality rate.